Insights for dream group leaders

By Montague Ullman, M.D.

In the spring of 1990 I held a special three-day workshop at the
suggestion of Jenny Green, someone who had worked with me over the years and
who had been leading groups of her own. Since she lived in Vermont, isolated
from other dream group workers, she felt the need for some kind of networking
arrangement to keep in touch with others who were leading groups as well as for
supervision of the work she was doing. I felt she was raising very timely
issues.

By this time there were a number of people who were competent to lead
groups and were doing so. I informed 10 other dream group leaders about Jenny's
suggestion.

Eight responded favorably, so that along with Jenny and myself the group
of 10 met for three days with an agenda that was to consider the general and
specific problems they faced in doing group dream work, to how best pursue
supervision and, finally, what further steps could be taken to provide a
supportive and helpful networking system.

The agenda we worked out was to devote the first day to the questions
they had and to the issues they wished to explore. The second day I would lead
the group with the goal of exploring some of the problems they might face at
each stage of the process. We then would do the same with a member of the group
taking over the leadership, leaving sufficient time at the end to plan for the
future.

It was a rich and productive three days and, in retrospect, I regret
that the discussions were not taped. What follows are summaries from my written
notes, modified by contributions and changes noted by those present.

Day One:

The question was raised about how one goes about getting people to join
a dream group.

Among the strategies used were:

-
Advertising in local newspapers

- Getting
involved in local adult education programs

- Writing
articles for loci publications.

For those who work in institutions there is the possibility of including
experiential dream group work as part of an in-service education program. An
example of this is the course I gave over many years in a residency training
program.

Another suggestion was to begin by offering free introductory sessions.
There was some discussion as to how effective that would be. People tend to
place more value on what they pay for.

There was general discussion of the problems that stood in the way of
attracting people to dream groups. Those who are most likely to be interested
are inundated with New Age ads and literature that often caters more to magical
expectations and instant gratification than a serious commitment to dream work.
The process we use does demand a certain level of maturity, and an ability to
attend to the needs of others. It is real, not magical.

The question came up of using my name in ads or fliers as a way to
attract participants. Here I urged some caution. In the past there have been
instances when my name has been misused and implied either certification by me
or competence in the method I use. I do not certify anyone as a leader in dream
work. This is a matter of personal responsibility and conscience. There have
been instances where people may have been in a group with me for a short time
or have had a single leadership workshop with me and then have advertised using
my name to imply competence.

I have no objection to using a reference to their work with me in the
context of a proper presentation of their credentials and in a way that doesn't
imply certification, and providing they have had sufficient training in the
method to in good conscience present themselves as competent to lead dream
groups, particularly if they seek to do it as paid professionals.

The next set of questions had to do with the make-up of the dream group.
Linda and Roberta were co-leading an all women group. From time to time they
thought of making it a mixed group but so far had decided not to. They felt
that in working with dreams, specific women's issues came up and they felt this
added to the feeling of unity in the group.

Jenny comes from a small town where people tend to know a good deal
about each other. There are assets and liabilities connected with this
familiarity. When the group is too incestuous there may be a tendency to take
liberties that will turn the process in the direction of becoming a therapy
group. On the other hand, people who know each other outside the group may have
an inhibiting effect. On the positive side, the knowledge that one or more
members of the group have of the dreamer can result in bringing their
projections in Stage II and later in the orchestration closer to the mark.

When people who do know each other in prior circumstances and do find
themselves in the same group, pre-existing tensions and even animosity may be
felt. In one instance which Jenny described that involved herself and another
person in the group, the process of dream sharing led to a natural resolution
of these feelings. The work evoked compassion and an ability to identify with
the human frailty of the other. In some instances there is a natural weeding
out of one or the other person involved in the problem in the course of time.

The next issue discussed was whether a group should be open or closed.
Linda and Roberta were reticent at first about bringing others into their
ongoing group. For practical reasons (people leaving) they had to. Soon they
found themselves looking forward to new people joining. "Looking back, I
liked the new energies. It was like letting others share in a growth
process," one said. Since both had at one time participated in my weekly
group which was an open one, I asked them how it felt. The comments were
generally favorable. There was some initial anxiety about the new person
changing the atmosphere in the group, but this soon dissipated. It is the
responsibility of the leader to see that the new person has had an orientation
to the process to make it easier to work within the structure.

Next we turned to some of the specific questions and situations that
arise in the course of the work.

Can material shared in the group in
connection with earlier dreams be included in the projections of Stage II, the
Playback and the Orchestration of a current dream?

The answer is yes, if all currently present were privy to that material.

Can you tell a person who missed a
session about the dream presented in his or her absence?

It is better not to since the dreamer should be the only one free to
break the bond of confidentiality about their own dream. It is also conceivable
that the dreamer might have handled the situation differently had the missing
person been present.

How do you call a group member's
attention to something they are doing wrong without their taking offense? For
instance, a group member seeks out the dreamer's association right after
hearing the dream in Stage 1.

Explain that the dreamer's associations are of vital importance but if
we started with the associations before Stage II, they would inevitably track
and limit our projections when we make the dream our own. Besides, when we return
the dream to the dreamer and invite her to offer associations, they are usually
much richer by virtue of the work the group has done with the dream.

What about when in Stage IIA a group
member proceeds to deal with the symbolism of the dream rather than focus on
the feelings?

Ask the person, "As you reflect on what you just said, can you say
what feeling you might have about it?"

What about when a group member asks a leading
question?

Clarify this by saying something like, "You undoubtedly feel there
is something more to be explored in this area. Can you rephrase your question
in a more open way that leaves the dreamer freer to go in any direction rather
than the direction you're suggesting?"

What if there are sexual themes that seem
to be suggested by the imagery that the group is refraining from talking about?

The reticence can be broken by the leader taking the initiative and
projecting sexual meaning into an image that appears sexually suggestive. A
little humor may help. I may remind the group that, after all, someone
well-known thought that dreams have something to do with sex.

How do you handle someone presenting a
dream who may tend to approach it in a one-sided way, e.g. exclusively in
spiritual terms?

Our only instrument is the dream itself and, by confronting her with
what the dream is actually saying, help her focus on gathering more relevant
associations needed to build the connections of the imagery to concrete life
events.

What if one person in the group keeps
handling the dream images in a very literal way and seems incapable of grasping
metaphorical meaning?

Occasionally it takes a good deal of time and seeing others develop
metaphorical possibilities to help alleviate what a colleague of mine, Jon
Tolaas, refers to as "metaphor blindness."

Can you reorient a group involved in
group therapy to feel at ease with the structure of the experiential dream
group process?

Once a group has consolidated into a group psychotherapeutic format it
may be difficult to reorient it to the experiential dream group process. In
group therapy people are used to expressing their thoughts freely about each
other and what is going on in the group at every moment. They are not used to a
structure that orients them solely to the dreamer, imposes on them the
responsibility for managing their own process and which may very well take up
the time of the entire session.

In Stage II where people are offering
their own projections, they sometimes get on a roll and it is hard to stop
them. Sometimes I feel they are trying to cover the entire dream and do it in a
competitive way. How should this be handled?

This may require some delicate handling as you don't want to inhibit the
spontaneity people can bring to their own projections yet, at the same time,
the leader must see to it that everyone has the opportunity to offer their
projections within the limited time available for this stage of the process.
Without singling out any particular person the leader, at some appropriate
time, may point to the need for projections to be as concise as possible so
that everyone has a chance, emphasizing that, since they are our own personal
projections, we are not in competition to see who can say the most about the
dream. It is one of those occasions where tact will be needed.

Someone asked if he could call the
dreamer after the session to offer an additional orchestration. Is this
appropriate?

It is better to refrain from doing this until the next meeting of the
group. This is the only way its appropriateness could be evaluated.

If the dreamer seems satisfied with the
work done on a dream, is it appropriate for someone in the group who has later
had some additional thoughts about the dream to offer a delayed orchestration?

Yes, but only at the invitation of the dreamer.

Often it seems people use the opportunity
to offer orchestrating projections to give reassurance to the dreamer.

We are all susceptible to rescue fantasies. It should be pointed out,
repeatedly if necessary, that the only valid reassurance comes from the success
the group has had in helping the dreamer come into contact with what the dream
is saying.

After offering their orchestrating
projection, some people tend to get into a discussion with the dreamer, often
in an attempt to get their point across.

The leader should intervene. Any effort to engage the dreamer in a
discussion to validate the orchestration should be avoided. All that should
occur following an orchestration is a moment or two to see if the dreamer
wishes to respond before going on to the next orchestration.

Sometimes there is a problem with people
who have done a lot of reading, superimposing on their orchestrating comments
broader theoretical ideas not warranted by what the dreamer has shared. There
is a tendency to involve Jungian archetypes or Freudian formulations that lead
to generalizations that go far beyond anything the dreamer has said.

It is up to the leader to caution those involved not to go beyond areas
delineated by the dreamer.

Sometimes a member will refer at some point in the
dialogue to a projection he had in the second stage and to which the dreamer
made no mention of in her response. Are they free to carry over at will
projections offered in the second stage into the dialogue?

Definitely not, unless in her response she has acknowledged the
projection as helpful. Once we return the dream to the dreamer it is no longer
our dream and we let go of our own earlier projections.

Sometimes the orchestrations go on for
too long or are monopolized by just a few in the group.

Again, there is only limited time for the orchestrations and the leader
has to intervene so as to arrange time for everyone to have a say. People will
respond to the request that they make their orchestration as concise as
possible.

Other points

Other important points of emphasis that came up in the course of
discussion were:

- The fact that the dreamer is in control of the process doesn't relieve
others of their responsibility, e.g., to confront the dreamer with every image
in the dream.

- The mark of a successful group is when group members themselves assume
the responsibility to correct others who may be misusing the process.

- Humor is important - at appropriate moments and handled in an
appropriate way that is not at the expense of the dreamer.

- Avoid asking "why" questions since they tend to put the
dreamer on the spot. In the playback, for example, instead of asking "why
do you think you put a cat in your dream?" phrase the question in such a
way as to help the dreamer explore the image e.g. "Do you have any further
associations to the appearance of a cat in your dream on the night you had the
dream?"

Note: This was based on an supervisory
workshop. Please contact Monte if you are interested in the next one.